|
 he
release of the Bush administration's energy proposals has European
and U.N. officials in another tizzy. They have
engaged in
one tirade after another against the U.S. over the last few months.
Much of the abuse is targeted at the Bush administration's refusal
to play global-warming make-believe with the rest of the world.
Mr. Jan Pronk,
Dutch Environment Minister and chairman of the sixth Conference
of Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change blasted
the plan saying, "Disconnecting energy and climate policies
from each other is fairly disastrous. We were expecting an all inclusive
program but that didn't happen."
U.N. Secretary
General Kofi Annan used his commencement address at the Fletcher
School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University this weekend to
berate the U.S., accusing the administration of putting the world
at risk. "Make no mistake all countries will suffer,"
he said, calling U.S. actions a "grievous setback."
The European
Union countries are especially upset since they are counting on
the Kyoto Protocol to help their economies vis-à-vis the
U.S. economy. This became crystal clear when an angered Margot Wallstrom,
the E.U. environment commissioner, stated that this was not about
environment or global warming but "about trying to create a
level playing field for big businesses throughout the world."
Some E.U. officials went so far as to threaten trade sanctions against
the U.S., claiming that our lower energy taxes are an unfair trade
advantage.
The economic
policies now prevalent throughout the E.U. (all but two of the 15
E.U. members have socialist governments) have stifled economic growth,
making it very difficult for their own industries to compete on
the international market. Heavy energy taxes and regulation have
slowed European economic growth to a near standstill. Rather than
liberalize their economies, however, European governments have sought
to saddle the U.S. energy system with similar hurdles through Kyoto.
This is clearly incompatible with President Bush's emphasis on freeing
the U.S. energy system from ill-conceived regulatory burdens that
have led to the current energy fiasco.
It becomes
even clearer upon closer examination of the Kyoto Protocol that
this is about economic warfare and not the environment. Kyoto puts
a heavier burden on the U.S. economy relative to the E.U. The E.U.
and U.S. have similar commitments under Kyoto. The U.S. would be
required to lower it greenhouse gas emission by seven percent below
1990 levels and the E.U. eight percent below 1990 levels.
The difference
is that the U.S. has experienced tremendous economic growth since
1990, causing carbon-dioxide emissions to go up significantly. The
EU economies have been sluggish. They also have the luxury of having
shut down much of East Germany's wasteful and inefficient industrial
capacity, moving them much closer to pre-1990 emission levels. European
enthusiasm for Kyoto would cool significantly if the baseline were
to change from 1990 to 2000, even if the overall greenhouse-gas
reductions were greater.
The European
politicians have another problem. They have invested a lot of political
capital in catastrophic global-warming theory at home and abroad,
but the science is not coalescing in their favor. In fact, the scientific
basis for climatic Armageddon, which was never solid in the first
place, has weakened considerably over the last six months. The best
evidence to date suggests that the amount of warming likely to occur
over the next 100 years would be trivial and perhaps beneficial
(a review of recent scientific advances is available at http://www.cei.org/OnPointReader.asp?ID=1477).
Time is running
out on Europe's politicians. As the science weakens, the shrillness
of their attacks increase. They desperately want to declare the
debate closed and force the U.S. to enter into an agreement before
scientific reality enters the public consciousness.
President Bush
must hold the line against such attempts. So far he has demonstrated
a clear understanding of both the scientific and economic realities.
His plan to free the U.S. energy system from the ill-conceived regulatory
burdens that have led to rolling blackouts and skyrocketing gasoline
prices would safeguard our energy future
Secretary General
Annan did get one thing right. "The United States…is the
world's leading emitter of greenhouse gases, largely because it
is the world's most successful economy." That is not something
to be ashamed of. Indeed, it should be a great source of pride for
the American people. The U.S. economy is successful because the
U.S. has democratized energy use to a greater extent than any other
country. Affordable energy is available to everyone in the U.S.,
both rich and poor. In other countries, especially developing countries,
only the elites enjoy the blessings of energy use. The poor are
often deprived of energy use, forcing them to suffer from frequent
power outages and inadequate transportation.
The goal shouldn't
be worldwide energy suppression, which is the inevitable outcome
of the Kyoto process, but the worldwide democratization of energy
use. That would do more than anything else to alleviate human suffering
and to improve the ability of people to care for the environment.
|
